You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Play nice. (This means you.)
Logins from the previous forum have been carried over; if you have difficulty logging in, please try resetting your password before contacting us. Attachments did not survive the migration--many apologies, but we're lucky we kept what we could!
mj12games.com/forum → Starmada → Federation CA data card
Here's one of the ships we'll be using in this weekend's playtests at DieCon...
I'm actually quite happy with the "look" -- I may be adapting it for non-SFU data cards.
And, because the Federation CA is useless without someone to fight... 
Very interesting - thanks for sharing. Good to see you are keeping the odd Klingon firing arcs.
I take it that "Drone Racks" launch some type of Seeker-type weapon. If so, shouldn't the Phaser-3 have Anti-Fighter or similar to show it's use as a point defense weapon?
With the Shield Facets would it not be easier to refer to these by the GHIJKL weapon arcs rather than using the new F/FP/FS etc notation?
Robin
Looks good. 8-)
Perhaps the range of the Phaser Ones should be increased to 18. In Star Fleet Battles, these phasers shot farther than any other ship weapon. This would also increase the cost of the Fed CA making it closer to the D7's cost. Also, make all the Klingon D7's phasers the Phaser Twos which could have a range of 15. Keep the range for the 'torpedos and the phaser Threes the same. :idea:
outstanding...looking forward to testing..
shields: are you using the faceted rules out of IS or a variation of? Can you post?
Looks good. 8-)
Perhaps the range of the Phaser Ones should be increased to 18. In Star Fleet Battles, these phasers shot farther than any other ship weapon.
Is this true? I can't say I'm a veteran SFB player -- but a glance at the weapon charts for Federation Commander shows that all weapons can fire out to 25 hexes, with the exception of Phaser-3s and overloaded Disruptors/Torpedoes. What I tried to do was give a bit of variety to the ranges based on damage potential.
For example, at the longest range, a Phaser-2's expected damage is 2/3 that of a Phaser-1. Assuming a "base" rage of 15 for Phaser-1s, if you cut the long range band by 1/3, you get a maximum range of 13.333, which is close enough to 12.
Likewise, a Disruptor's expected damage in SFB/FC at 16-25 hexes is twice that of a Phaser-1; if you double the Phaser-1's long range band, you get a range of 20, which is close enough to 18.
The question is what to do with Photon Torpedoes... I've got them at 15, but they probably should be 18, since they have roughly the same damage potential from range 9-25 as Disruptors (average of 1.6 hits per shot, compared to 1.4 for Disruptors).
Also, make all the Klingon D7's phasers the Phaser Twos which could have a range of 15. Keep the range for the 'torpedos and the phaser Threes the same. :idea:
In Federation Commander, the D7 has three Phaser-1s... I don't know what it has/had in SFB.
If so, shouldn't the Phaser-3 have Anti-Fighter or similar to show it's use as a point defense weapon?
Good idea.
With the Shield Facets would it not be easier to refer to these by the GHIJKL weapon arcs rather than using the new F/FP/FS etc notation?
Perhaps... but the precedent's already been set by Starmada: Iron Stars.
shields: are you using the faceted rules out of IS or a variation of? Can you post?
For the playtest, we're just using the faceted rules from Starmada: Iron Stars, with a couple tweaks to try and capture the importance of maneuver in SFB/FC.
I know a lot of people have been hoping for some type of ablative shielding -- but I just don't see how it can work without radically changing the game.
Essentially, every option for the game should be "plug-n-play", in that it can be put into the game (or left out) without affecting any other rules. However, ablative shielding would change all sorts of things:
1) Combat would have to become sequential.
2) A large number of weapon traits would have to be radically altered (or forbidden).
3) The damage roll would be changed.
And so on.
Well, nice going.
You definitely sound like a candidate for the Mr. Poopy Pants Award for Sunday, May 31st.
:roll:
I know a lot of people have been hoping for some type of ablative shielding -- but I just don't see how it can work without radically changing the game.
A radical thought, but what if the first damage 'roll' for any weapon battery was a shield hit. So if the D7 shot three Phaser 1 and got to roll 4 damage rolls (after the to hit and impact rolls), the first would be a shield hit and the other 3 would be rolled as normal.
To make that change fit in to the nature of your 'plug and play' system (a great idea IMO), you could cost it out like the special ability (free pivot if I remember correctly) the Grumm have on their ships.
Honestly, it would be really cool if all damage went into the shields on that arc first (so if the D7 was being hit from the F arc, the first 3 damage rolls would bring the shields down in the F arc with one point to be placed in an adjacent arc since 3 shield hits require 4 screens to be damaged) with the rest of the damage being rolled on the normal chart and point cost that ability as the Grumm ships above. Not sure if that would actually work in the scope of the other rulebooks out there, but it's a thought.
-Bren
Some SFB stats..
Phaser-1 (Ph-1) maximum range was 75, cost 1 energy point,
Phaser-2 (Ph-2) maxium range of 50, cost 1 energy point,
Phaser-3 (Ph-3) maximum range of 15, cost 1/2 energy point,
Phaser-4 (Ph-4) maximum range was 100, cost 2 energy points, but this was a base-only weapon,
(costs are just to show what it took to arm them)
but I don't recall people shooting past range 30 with intact ships except once in a fleet battle, although long range sniping from a very damaged ship happened once in a while,
all torpedo type weapons had a maxium range of 30, exception: in some versions the disruptor maximum range was determined by the size of the ship: small to large went from 15 (escort), 22 (destroyer/frigate), 30 (cruiser), and, I think, 45 (dreadnought/battleship).
All phasers shot at drones and shuttles/fighters with the same penalty (none), while direct-firing torpedoes had a -2. IMO, all phasers should have the anti-fighter bonus.
The Ph-1 was the most energy efficient ship-based weapon of the game. The Ph-2 was close, but damage tended to drop off quickly in comparison. The Ph-2 at range 0 averaged better damaged than the Ph-1, but only at range 0. Phasers were the most versatile weapons. They just didn't have the punch of an overloaded torpedo, but then overloaded torpedoes were very energy-consuming. And in SFB, energy is life.
The D7C (Command version of the D7) had it's 3 forward Ph-2s replaced with Ph-1s.
The D7's cost/combat rating was always less than the Fed's heavy cruiser. It took a refit (D7B) with increased shielding in the rear (and other stuff I can't recall, although faster drone shooting was one) to match the Fed CA in cost.
I see a lot of single arc weapons in your designs. Single arc weapons in SFB were very rare.
I would go with FC on ship designs, since that is the newest and most streamlined version of SFB. I've yet to see FC, but Starmada designs based on it would probably fit better.
A radical thought, but what if the first damage 'roll' for any weapon battery was a shield hit. So if the D7 shot three Phaser 1 and got to roll 4 damage rolls (after the to hit and impact rolls), the first would be a shield hit and the other 3 would be rolled as normal.
I like this idea. Normally in SFB you had to bring the entire shield down on a side to get damage on the ship, so any excess damage over the shield rating would be rolled as normal.
IMO, to be more like Starmada with a touch of SFB, just having the first hit from one enemy ship's fire automatically hit the facing shield and the rest rolled as normal.
some more data (had to reread the thread to remember these things)...
Photon torpedo: always did 8 points of damage, no matter the range, it just had a very low hit probability at long ranges. Took 2 turns to arm, costing 2 energy per turn.
Disruptor: better hit probability, but lower damage and damage was based on range. Took one turn to arm (can fire every round) costing 2 energy to arm. The disruptor, at ranges from 9-15, rivaled the Ph-1 in damage-to-energy ratio.
Overloaded torpedoes did double the damage, costing twice as much power to arm, with a maxium range of 8.
I like what you did with overloading since you don't get quite double the damage so it takes more thought if you want to use it. In SFB games I played torpedoes were almost always overloaded when the combat was within range 8 and energy could be spared for it.
Shields (if I remember these correctly, and I just threw out all the SSDs with huge dust bunnies sitting on them 
) ...
Fed CA : 30, 24, 24, 20, 20, 20
Klingon D7 : 30, 22, 22, 15, 15, 13
D7B & D7C : 30, 22, 22, 20, 20, 20
IMO (and I hate to say this since I usually play Klingons), change the AS and AP shielding of the D7 to 1-1 (instead of 2-1). This might help bring the cost of the D7 down.
hull...
Klingon ships were a little more fragile than their Federation counterparts (had less hull boxes and "free hits", e.g., Labs), so I suggest changing the Klingon D7's hull to 9. Of course, maybe you can't fit stuff into a 9 hull?
engines...
All ships had the same maximum speed in SFB (31), but Klingons did have better turning capabilities, so the engine ratings seem fine.
Looks good. 8-)
Perhaps the range of the Phaser Ones should be increased to 18. In Star Fleet Battles, these phasers shot farther than any other ship weapon. This would also increase the cost of the Fed CA making it closer to the D7's cost. Also, make all the Klingon D7's phasers the Phaser Twos which could have a range of 15. Keep the range for the 'torpedos and the phaser Threes the same. :idea:
I agree with this, except ..
I'd lower the Phaser-3's range to 6, they were really short ranged weapons and only did real damage at very close ranges.
Now the problem is the way Starmada movement works vs how SFB movement works, especially when it comes to fighters. In SFB, those short-ranged Phaser-3s had a chance to knock out fighters as those fighters moved in, but with Starmada's move-full-distance-then-shoot we have fighters outside of the Ph-3 range now moving within range and firing before the Ph-3s can shoot at them. I don't know if this can be remedied, excepting to make Ph-3 range out to 12, but that really does not seem right.
Not to be a goof, but as a Federation Commander player (and new owner of Starmada) as I understand it this crossover product is an FC-crossover not an SFB crossover so quoting a bunch of SFB hulls is not necessarily useful. Though I could be entirely wrong on that point, that's just what I understand from reading the FC forums.
So some notes to SFB players:
-All ships that appear in FC are the fully upgraded versions. (not including the new Middle Years supplement coming out)
The only race that has fighters are the Hydrans. Fighters are available for the other races in "Borders of Madness" but these are not official FC units per say. There are no armed shuttles.
-Klingons do not have mutinies or security stations.
-The longest any direct fire weapon can shoot is 25 hexes (Ph-1,2,4 Disruptor, Photon, Hellbore, Web Fist etcetera). Phaser 3 is 15 hexes, some other weapons like Shield Breaker and Web Cracker (Seltorians) only go out to 10 hexes. (some small ships have 15 hex restrictions on Disruptors)
-All offensive drones are the same type (damage 12, speed 24).
-There are no fancy weapon options for things like Photons and Disruptors. Only standard, and overloaded (ie no prox Photons).
-Likewise no Psuedo plasma (whatever that is), only Plasma R,S,G,F,D (F's can carronade).
So the FCunits portrayed are:
Klingon D7 with 30/22/22/22/22/22 shields. 3 Phasers 1, 6 Phaser-2s, 2 Drones and 4 Disruptors. The ship has 39+3 power with 89 boxes + 4 frame. Cost 138 (Drones have 4 ammo each)
Federation CA with 30/24/24/24/24/24 shields. 8 Phaser 1, 2 Phaser 3, 1 Drone and 4 Photons. 36+4 power with 97 boxes + 6 frame. Cost 147 (Drone has 2 offensive ammo, 4 defensive ammo)
I think if the Arcs on the Federation's Ph-1 was change it would help change to point cost. The arcs are 2x Forward 180', 2x left forward 120', 2x right forward 120', and 2x rear 180'. So in Starmada X terms that would be:
[AC][AC][BD][BD][GHI][GHI][JKL][JKL] (assuming that GHI=forward 180, JKL=rear 180)
What about ships with ablative shielding..
Couldn't each shield be treated in such a way that if it is hit, that arc is reduced by a point. Instead of a dice roll to determine if the shield actually blocked the hit, if the ship is hit, you reduce that arc by one point. This would mean that each arc just has some value that it can block, then when enough damage has been done to the shield, it's done. All hits directly contact the ship. Once you determine the attack hits the ship, it automatically goes towards reducing the shield strength before hitting the hull.
Photon torpedo comes in, succesfully hits the target, but the shields are up and this is the first attack and the shields are at full strength. The torpedo reduces "some protection value" of that shield arc. Each additional hit does the same until the shield is down for that sequence. Assuming the shield generator is undamaged, the shield will recharge. So instead of a shield rating of 5,4,3, etc... you might have a shield rating of, say 20 which means you have arcs that can absorb a total of 20 hits before downing. This means just giving a bucket of damage absorbtion points to each ship. Maybe you can make a fixed number...what ever the Starmada shield rating is, multiply by X and that is your total shield points of protection.
Might be just gibberish, but it just rolled out of the back of my mind.
Terminology:
Since Dreadnoughts uses "Armor" and not "Shields." It might be nice to convert "teleporters" to "transporters." Wait, just saw the D7 says transporters, but the CA doesn't
Don't me wrong, I LOVE the fact you made this happen. Please consider all of this constructive crit.
Updated card to reflect various suggestions...
This is fun.
EDIT: I know, the Photons should be 1/1/3 (1/1/5 for overload), not 1/3/1 (1/5/1).
The point cost is correct, however.
It's fun to read, too! 
Kinda a tangential question. . . but I don't know too much about FedCom. I guess one thing just struck me looking at these cards. . .
Seems like a Federation heavy cruiser ought to get its clock cleaned by a Klingon Battlecruiser. Yet from what I can tell they seem comparable.
Is this just because Fed tech is supposed to be so inherently better than Klingon tech. . . or just a fast and loose application of terms like Heavy cruiser vs. Battlecruiser. . .or just some legacy from Star Trek lore. . . just wondering how this situation came to be.
Really excited about this game BTW.
Quick question / comment on the Fed CA photons... The data card shows that overloaded photons are slow loading but normal photons arent. A big part of Klingon / Fed duals in SFB / FC is that the photons are all 2 turn arming weapons (thus slow loading) versus the single turn lower damage per turn weapons on the klingon ships.
Essentially the fed CA keeps alive with its better shielding and the deterrent of its PH-1 batteries until it can give killing blows with its normal or overloaded photons. Having photons available every turn really loses that flavor although having it there for the overloads is livable I suppose since the only dif in arming normal vs overloads was power available and there is no energy allocation in starmada.
Updated card to reflect various suggestions...
The biggest thing I see that feels off is the ranges. Effective phaser range always exceeded photon and disruptor range. One of my favorite tactics back in the day was to stay just beyond effective disruptor/photon range and chew up the target with my phasers. The occasional torp hit was too infrequent to hurt and disruptor damage dropped so drastically at range they didn't matter. With a photon only being fired every other turn a sqd of small fast ships can rip a heavy to shreds
Kinda a tangential question. . . but I don't know too much about FedCom. I guess one thing just struck me looking at these cards. . .
Seems like a Federation heavy cruiser ought to get its clock cleaned by a Klingon Battlecruiser. Yet from what I can tell they seem comparable.
Is this just because Fed tech is supposed to be so inherently better than Klingon tech. . . or just a fast and loose application of terms like Heavy cruiser vs. Battlecruiser. . .or just some legacy from Star Trek lore. . . just wondering how this situation came to be.
Really excited about this game BTW.
Your mixing terms across race lines. The original Klingon D-7's used to be much lighter on the staying power side. While they packed a lot of firepower they couldn't sustain a lot of hits. In my original thin pack game from back in the late 70's a D-7 never had weaps more powerful than Ph2 + Dist while the Fed CA had Ph1 + Photons. The photon took longer but retained its punch and the ph1 was more powerful and had greater reach. Disruptor were close-in weapons and Ph2's were shorter as well. Since the D-7 had tough forward shields but tissue paper rear ones it fit the Klingon attack strategy. The Fed CA had tough all around shields and lots of interior to suck up damage.
At first 1 Fed CA was a match for 2 D-7's, that is why you always saw D-7's in groups of 3. But SFB wanted something to be 1 on 1 so they adjusted the D-7 up. They made it a bit tougher and really slowed it down to have the same move cost as a Fed CA. Since it was a game and they really needed a 1 on 1 match-up this flew. But I still have some of the old SDD's from way back.
Seems like a Federation heavy cruiser ought to get its clock cleaned by a Klingon Battlecruiser. Yet from what I can tell they seem comparable.
Is this just because Fed tech is supposed to be so inherently better than Klingon tech. . . or just a fast and loose application of terms like Heavy cruiser vs. Battlecruiser. . .or just some legacy from Star Trek lore. . . just wondering how this situation came to be.
Different factions use different ship class names for what are basically comparable craft. So yes a Klingon Battlecruiser is roughly comparable to a Federation Heavy Cruiser. FASA's old Star Trek Tactical Combat Simulator was supposidely even worse, and one Fed CA was a match for not one but THREE Klingon BCs.
But in SFU other factions might have say Heavy Destroyer, and another has Light Cruiser but the two are roughly an even match.
The biggest thing I see that feels off is the ranges. Effective phaser range always exceeded photon and disruptor range. One of my favorite tactics back in the day was to stay just beyond effective disruptor/photon range and chew up the target with my phasers. The occasional torp hit was too infrequent to hurt and disruptor damage dropped so drastically at range they didn't matter. With a photon only being fired every other turn a sqd of small fast ships can rip a heavy to shreds
I'm surprised such a tactic worked. With the ability to soak damage with battery power I'm not sure how delivering the occasional one or two points of phaser damage is going to do much of anything. Would make for a very long game if nothing else.
Is this just because Fed tech is supposed to be so inherently better than Klingon tech. . . or just a fast and loose application of terms like Heavy cruiser vs. Battlecruiser. . .or just some legacy from Star Trek lore. . . just wondering how this situation came to be.
(b) and (c).
mj12games.com/forum → Starmada → Federation CA data card
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.